One of the problems healers have is with xp in small groups. I was thinking this could be fixed if healers got xp from shares a little differently (just healers though perhaps mystics could be thrown this bone too):

1st person to share them gives 25%
2nd person to share them gives 20%
3rd person to share them gives 15%
4th person and every person after gives 10%

The healers would have to tell people to share them in a certain order if they were worried about who was giving which percentage. This would allow a healer to hunt with a part of 3 fighters and still get 60% of the xp earned by the group. This might encourage more healers to come out and play even when there is not a big hunt with lots of shares. Doesn't that sound reasonable?

Sounds like a headache to me, it would be one hell of a faff to start each hunt with right share me in order 1 2 3 4 no no fighter 2 fighter 1 wasnt paying attention so you need to unshare me and reshare me when i tell you, then later on oh fighter 2 has DC'd and dropped his shares right fighters 3 and 4 when he gets back please unshare me then reshare me in order again.

To say nothing of what happens if somebody joins/leaves/gets replaced which would require a complete reshuffling of the shares.

For something like this to work the healer would have to be able to designate which share they wanted to fill each slot rather than requiring the fighters to do it in order (look how hard it is to get circle shares sorted and magnify that by 5)

I look at it from a different angle. Not so much that healers/mystics need more XP per share, but rather that fighters need a bonus for sharing the healers/mystics in the first place. No, I do not mean an XP bonus, but perhaps a balance bonus or such.

this could really be true...
at least it should be something like if someone re-shares and is idle (xp-wise all healers are idle) you get streamed back of your earned xp...

Anyhow the game mechanic teaches that you share those who help you when you're fallen the next day again...
If none of them are around I prefer sharing those who share back and not those who seem to take it as the most natural of the world to be shared while not shareing back...
I often see it when 5-7 people are around (including Stora and Libra Ann) and only a few of them shareing back...
I really prefer to give Stora some xp than those other non-caring people then...

@topic: I believe it's not noted in the database which was the first incoming share and what was the second...
Thats not how anyone would code that I'd assume... And even if it would be - and would be treated differently there would be a problem... what happens if #1 unshares while #2 still shares and then #1 shares again? Easy to say "move down in the queue" but pretty unhandy to code...
Maybe better something like
if (num(inc_shares) == 1) earned_xp = streamed_xp * 1.5
elseif (num(inc_shares) == 2) earned_xp = streamed_xp * 1.4
...

The database must keep track of the order of shares because it drops them off in order. ON the other hand, Mjollnir's post gave me a nice chuckle. At last the fighters could laugh at the healers share problem, instead of us laughing at their sorry attempts at circling

It isn't about accelerating experience for healers, it is about providing experience equivalent to difficulty.

Gurgi suggested the idea on a hunt in Slate Caves, one of the most challenging areas in the game. I made a comment about how I rank about once an hour there with a good pace (which is insane for me) and Kisa/Astor commented afterwards that their experience was not that good. We then agreed that a RF farm hunt with 1/2 bricks and 5+ taggers is mostly boring, not challenging at all, yet yields more experience. Since we only had 4 fighters, none of which were "great" shares, the experience they gained pales in comparison to the RF hunts even though it is 10x more difficult.

I think Gurgi came up with this idea to help make a slate cave style hunt (or any uber high level area where taggers can't come) as profitable for healers as a RF hunt. It makes sense given the huge disparity in difficulty.

I would support a suggestion to allow a 'guaranteed minimum' experience per day. For example, if everyone was guaranteed to earn at least one-half rank per day that would be great. I don't know how bad being a super oldbie is, but it seems like it would get really slow.

Turalyon[DaTz] wrote:It isn't about accelerating experience for healers, it is about providing experience equivalent to difficulty.

Gurgi suggested the idea on a hunt in Slate Caves, one of the most challenging areas in the game. I made a comment about how I rank about once an hour there with a good pace (which is insane for me) and Kisa/Astor commented afterwards that their experience was not that good. We then agreed that a RF farm hunt with 1/2 bricks and 5+ taggers is mostly boring, not challenging at all, yet yields more experience. Since we only had 4 fighters, none of which were "great" shares, the experience they gained pales in comparison to the RF hunts even though it is 10x more difficult.

I think Gurgi came up with this idea to help make a slate cave style hunt (or any uber high level area where taggers can't come) as profitable for healers as a RF hunt. It makes sense given the huge disparity in difficulty.

I think this is really useful context for making clear the problem the OP is trying to address.

I think letting healers prioritize among incoming share somehow might be the best option, or maybe just multiplying the exp. from higher lever players, to make up for the lesser amount of exp. they generate.

6/9/10 9:38:37a Eirian Caldwell has fallen to a Dragonfly.
4/14/15 8:53:57p Geotzou says, "i am very patient, except if i have to wait."